Olivia
Online
ⓉⒷⓄ_GianLuca
@TBO_GianLuca
🇮🇹 TEchBIoeCO 🇪🇺
Joined October 2014
1.5K Following
159 Followers
176 Posts
L’AI non è neutrale: tre fronti di guerra e un solo perdente https://t.co/bkfB39Kmqo
🙏 Thanks to the European Open Source Academy for publishing the interview with our CEO @gael_duval on fighting for our right to digital freedom!
Find out more about his challenges and why you should care about digital sovereignty.
👉 https://t.co/2nGm3QVuBE
#EUTech
Morto Giuseppe Crippa, 're' della microelettronica italiana. Fondatore della Technoprobe, fra gli uomini più ricchi d'Italia #ANSA https://t.co/Kx2SDHues7
🔵 Morto Giuseppe #Crippa, 're' della microelettronica italiana. Gli inizi alla Breda e 30 anni a quella che divenne STMicroelectronics, fino a creare tra garage e soffitta nel 1993, poco prima di andare in pensione, #Technoprobe che lo rese miliardario. Aveva 90 anni
E' morto a 90 anni Giuseppe Crippa, fondatore a Cernusco Lombardone (Lc) della Technoprobe. L'azienda, quotata in borsa e con sedi in tutto il mondo, è leader nel settore della microelettronica. Il ministro Giorgetti: "Un imprenditore visionario"
@TgrRai Lombardia
#IoSeguoTgr
MIT climate scientist (and former IPCC lead author) Dr. Richard Lindzen:
"It will be remembered as the greatest mass delusion in the history of the world - that CO2, the life of plants, was considered for a time to be a deadly poison."
Do you like math?
Do you like making climate activists cry?
If so, this post is for you. 🫵
They advertise utility-scale solar photovoltaic (PV) and wind as being “eco-friendly” energy technologies because they emit less CO₂ over their total lifecycle. Emissions is all the “greens” like to jack their sausage holsters about. But, when you point out to them just how land intensive their “green” energy technologies are, they squirm trying to justify being vehemently opposed to nuclear fission — a near-infinite, carbon-free, energy-dense electricity source — and working to destroying the landscape with massive amounts of solar cells and wind farms to save the planet.
Let's run the numbers, shall we?
𝐍𝐔𝐂𝐋𝐄𝐀𝐑 𝐅��𝐒𝐒𝐈𝐎𝐍 ⚛️
The standard nuclear reactor has a 1,000-megawatt (MW) rating. This means that each plant is, on average, installed with 1,000 MW of power capacity. A 1,000-MW nuclear facility occupies, on average, just over 1 square mile (640 acres) of land.
To figure out just how many homes a single 1,000 MW plant could power, we can start by using the following equation,
𝑬 = 𝑷 × 𝒕, where,
• 𝑬 = energy (megawatt hours, MWh)
• 𝑷 = power (MW)
• 𝒕 = time (hours, hr)
If we assume a 1,000 MW nuclear reactor operates at FULL power during an entire calendar year, it will produce ~8.76 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity per year.
𝑬 = 1,000 MW × 24 hr (1-day) × 365 [days] (1 yr) = 8.76 million MWh / yr (8.76 TWh / yr)
However, reactors do 𝒏𝒐𝒕 operate at full power 100% of the time because they come offline for refueling or to undergo maintenance. Therefore, we must take the capacity factor into consideration in our calculation.
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), nuclear power has the highest capacity factor of any electricity generation source in the U.S. at 0.93 in 2023.
🔗https://t.co/Y938aQqT9G
What this value means is that nuclear reactors in the U.S. operated at full installed power for about 93% of the calendar year in 2023.
So, to figure out how much electricity that each plant produces in a year, we must multiply the previously calculated value of 8.76 TWh by the capacity factor of
0.93. If we do that, we get,
𝑬 = (8.76 TWh / year) × 0.93 ≈ 8.15 TWh / yr
Now, to determine just how many homes this powers, we must divide 𝑬 by the average amount of electricity U.S. homeowners purchase in a year. According to the EIA, that number is ~10,500 kilowatt-hours (KWh) or 1.05 × 10⁻⁵ TWh.
🔗https://t.co/9vca2DxIP6
Thus, dividing 8.15 TWh / yr by 1.05 × 10⁻⁵ TWh / yr gives us about 776,190 homes.
Therefore, a 1,000 MW nuclear electricity generation station occupying one square mile of land, operating with a capacity factor of 0.93, can power more than 775,000 homes throughout the course of a year based on U.S. data.
Now that is pretty energy-dense, eh? Why would any climate activist be opposed to that?
Let's now compare nuclear to the greens' preferred solar and wind technologies.
𝐒𝐎𝐋𝐀𝐑 𝐏𝐕 ☀️
A utility-scale solar PV array requires at least 1 MW of installed power.
🔗https://t.co/SygGgNZgYB
A1 MW solar PV array requires about 5-7 acres of land according to the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA).
🔗https://t.co/LSMv9n25wR
And, according to the EIA, solar had a capacity factor of 0.232 last year in the U.S., by far the 𝒍𝒐𝒘𝒆𝒔𝒕 of any energy source. What this means is that solar PV arrays only operated at full power 23.2% of the year in 2023 due to variable weather conditions and sky cover.
By using the same calculations as above, a 1,000 MW solar PV array would occupy some 5,000-7,000 acres of land (mean of ~6,000 acres), all the while powering 193,523 homes, some 582,667 fewer homes than if it were nuclear power.
Yikes, that doesn't sound very efficient. 😬
𝐎𝐍𝐒𝐇𝐎𝐑𝐄 𝐖𝐈𝐍𝐃
A single utility-scale wind turbine occupies ~80 acres of land, which each turbine given a 2.5 MW rating.
A 1,000 MW onshore wind farm would require about 400 2.5-MW turbines occupying some 32,000 acres of land area.
And, according to the EIA, wind had a capacity factor of 0.332 in 2023, meaning that U.S. utility-scale wind farms operated at full power capacity for 33.2% of the year last year.
If we employ the same methods as before, we'll find that a 1,000 MW wind farm could power about 277,143 homes for one year. Therefore, a 1,000 MW wind farm would power 499,047 fewer homes than a 1,000 MW nuclear facility while occupying over 50 times as much land area.
That's not exactly efficient either, now, is it?
𝐒𝐔𝐌𝐌𝐀𝐑𝐈𝐙𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐈𝐓 𝐀𝐋𝐋 𝐔𝐏
In order to power the same number of homes that a 1,000 MW nuclear power plant can, it would require either:
• For 𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐚𝐫 𝐏𝐕: Approximately 4,000 MW of installed power (equivalent to four nuclear facilities) and 24,000 acres of land (some 37.5 × as much land area than a nuclear plant).
• For 𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐝: Approximately 2,800 MW of installed power (equivalent to 2.8 nuclear facilities) and 89,600 acres of land (some 140 × as much land area than a nuclear power generation station).
But, I should caution you that these estimates are in fact conservative. Why? Because they do 𝒏𝒐𝒕 take into consideration land area required for battery storage due to their intermittency in overcast sky conditions, low wind speed and/or overnight.
Based on land requirements alone, if climate activists were serious environmentalists, they would support deployment of more nuclear power. Some of them do, but most I have interacted with don't and find terrible excuses to support massive amounts of solar PV and onshore wind farm construction.
Nuclear power represents both continued economic growth and a clean energy future.
But, many climate activists don't want continued economic growth. They want to abolish capitalism and overturn western culture.
![ChrisMartzWX's tweet photo. Do you like math?
Do you like making climate activists cry?
If so, this post is for you. 🫵
They advertise utility-scale solar photovoltaic (PV) and wind as being “eco-friendly” energy technologies because they emit less CO₂ over their total lifecycle. Emissions is all the “greens” like to jack their sausage holsters about. But, when you point out to them just how land intensive their “green” energy technologies are, they squirm trying to justify being vehemently opposed to nuclear fission — a near-infinite, carbon-free, energy-dense electricity source — and working to destroying the landscape with massive amounts of solar cells and wind farms to save the planet.
Let's run the numbers, shall we?
𝐍𝐔𝐂𝐋𝐄𝐀𝐑 𝐅��𝐒𝐒𝐈𝐎𝐍 ⚛️
The standard nuclear reactor has a 1,000-megawatt (MW) rating. This means that each plant is, on average, installed with 1,000 MW of power capacity. A 1,000-MW nuclear facility occupies, on average, just over 1 square mile (640 acres) of land.
To figure out just how many homes a single 1,000 MW plant could power, we can start by using the following equation,
𝑬 = 𝑷 × 𝒕, where,
• 𝑬 = energy (megawatt hours, MWh)
• 𝑷 = power (MW)
• 𝒕 = time (hours, hr)
If we assume a 1,000 MW nuclear reactor operates at FULL power during an entire calendar year, it will produce ~8.76 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity per year.
𝑬 = 1,000 MW × 24 hr (1-day) × 365 [days] (1 yr) = 8.76 million MWh / yr (8.76 TWh / yr)
However, reactors do 𝒏𝒐𝒕 operate at full power 100% of the time because they come offline for refueling or to undergo maintenance. Therefore, we must take the capacity factor into consideration in our calculation.
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), nuclear power has the highest capacity factor of any electricity generation source in the U.S. at 0.93 in 2023.
🔗https://t.co/Y938aQqT9G
What this value means is that nuclear reactors in the U.S. operated at full installed power for about 93% of the calendar year in 2023.
So, to figure out how much electricity that each plant produces in a year, we must multiply the previously calculated value of 8.76 TWh by the capacity factor of
0.93. If we do that, we get,
𝑬 = (8.76 TWh / year) × 0.93 ≈ 8.15 TWh / yr
Now, to determine just how many homes this powers, we must divide 𝑬 by the average amount of electricity U.S. homeowners purchase in a year. According to the EIA, that number is ~10,500 kilowatt-hours (KWh) or 1.05 × 10⁻⁵ TWh.
🔗https://t.co/9vca2DxIP6
Thus, dividing 8.15 TWh / yr by 1.05 × 10⁻⁵ TWh / yr gives us about 776,190 homes.
Therefore, a 1,000 MW nuclear electricity generation station occupying one square mile of land, operating with a capacity factor of 0.93, can power more than 775,000 homes throughout the course of a year based on U.S. data.
Now that is pretty energy-dense, eh? Why would any climate activist be opposed to that?
Let's now compare nuclear to the greens' preferred solar and wind technologies.
𝐒𝐎𝐋𝐀𝐑 𝐏𝐕 ☀️
A utility-scale solar PV array requires at least 1 MW of installed power.
🔗https://t.co/SygGgNZgYB
A1 MW solar PV array requires about 5-7 acres of land according to the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA).
🔗https://t.co/LSMv9n25wR
And, according to the EIA, solar had a capacity factor of 0.232 last year in the U.S., by far the 𝒍𝒐𝒘𝒆𝒔𝒕 of any energy source. What this means is that solar PV arrays only operated at full power 23.2% of the year in 2023 due to variable weather conditions and sky cover.
By using the same calculations as above, a 1,000 MW solar PV array would occupy some 5,000-7,000 acres of land (mean of ~6,000 acres), all the while powering 193,523 homes, some 582,667 fewer homes than if it were nuclear power.
Yikes, that doesn't sound very efficient. 😬
𝐎𝐍𝐒𝐇𝐎𝐑𝐄 𝐖𝐈𝐍𝐃
A single utility-scale wind turbine occupies ~80 acres of land, which each turbine given a 2.5 MW rating.
A 1,000 MW onshore wind farm would require about 400 2.5-MW turbines occupying some 32,000 acres of land area.
And, according to the EIA, wind had a capacity factor of 0.332 in 2023, meaning that U.S. utility-scale wind farms operated at full power capacity for 33.2% of the year last year.
If we employ the same methods as before, we'll find that a 1,000 MW wind farm could power about 277,143 homes for one year. Therefore, a 1,000 MW wind farm would power 499,047 fewer homes than a 1,000 MW nuclear facility while occupying over 50 times as much land area.
That's not exactly efficient either, now, is it?
𝐒𝐔𝐌𝐌𝐀𝐑𝐈𝐙𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐈𝐓 𝐀𝐋𝐋 𝐔𝐏
In order to power the same number of homes that a 1,000 MW nuclear power plant can, it would require either:
• For 𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐚𝐫 𝐏𝐕: Approximately 4,000 MW of installed power (equivalent to four nuclear facilities) and 24,000 acres of land (some 37.5 × as much land area than a nuclear plant).
• For 𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐝: Approximately 2,800 MW of installed power (equivalent to 2.8 nuclear facilities) and 89,600 acres of land (some 140 × as much land area than a nuclear power generation station).
But, I should caution you that these estimates are in fact conservative. Why? Because they do 𝒏𝒐𝒕 take into consideration land area required for battery storage due to their intermittency in overcast sky conditions, low wind speed and/or overnight.
Based on land requirements alone, if climate activists were serious environmentalists, they would support deployment of more nuclear power. Some of them do, but most I have interacted with don't and find terrible excuses to support massive amounts of solar PV and onshore wind farm construction.
Nuclear power represents both continued economic growth and a clean energy future.
But, many climate activists don't want continued economic growth. They want to abolish capitalism and overturn western culture.](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GgDoUjQWEAAUT19.png)
Gesundheitspolitik und NATO
Die neue Gesundheitsministerin Fleu Agema (PVV, Geert Wilders) bedauert, dass sie die Gesundheit entgegen ihren Wahlversprechen nun der NATO unterordnen muss, weil ihr Amt das verlangt.
Ein entlarvendes Statement aus dem niederländischen Parlament, auf das mich die Ärztin @veen_els aufmerksam machte. Sie schreibt in einem langen Post, erst jetzt sei ihr klar geworden, warum man bei Corona mit so brutaler Härte gegen Ärzte, Demonstranten usw. vorging. Die „pandemic preparedness” ist kein medizinisches, sondern ein militärisches Projekt, bei uns in Deutschland gut erkennbar durch das damalige Kommando von NATO-General Holtherm über das @rki_de.
In den Niederlanden liegt die Steuerung der Gesundheitspolitik beim NCTV, dem Nationalen Koordinator für Sicherheit und Terrorismusabwehr. Die Gesundheitsministerin ist Aushängeschild und muss an Lockdowns usw. umsetzen, was immer von ihr verlangt wird.
The arrest of @Durov is an assault on the basic human rights of speech and association. I am surprised and deeply saddened that Macron has descended to the level of taking hostages as a means for gaining access to private communications. It lowers not only France, but the world.
Arrestato il fondatore di Telegram, Pavel Durov ,non appena sbarcato a Parigi. Lo accusano di aver permesso ad altre persone di usare Telegram per attività illegali di vario tipo, compreso il traffico di droga. Durov deve rispondere dei reati commessi da terzi? Non ricordo comunque di aver mai visto un giudice europeo emettere un mandato di arresto contro Zuckerberg, che sulla sua piattaforma, Facebook, consente apertamente la pedofilia. Questa è l'Unione europea e la Francia di Macron. Chiamano la Russia "dittatura" e fanno delle cose che non si vedevano nemmeno nell'URSS di Stalin.
Another exceptionally warm night in EUROPE, with several records of June high minums broken
ESTONIA:22.9 Voru (also 2nd hottest June night in Estonia history), 20.5 Valga, 20.3 Jogeva
BELARUS: 22.2 Vitebsk
RUSSIA: 21.9 Gdov
FINLAND:21.2 Lappeeranta,20.7 Kuopio,20.2 Porvoo,..
#FoodforProfit, di @giuliainnocenzi e Pablo D'Ambrosi, è un documentario che mostra il filo che lega l’industria della carne, le lobby e il potere politico.
Al centro ci sono i miliardi di € che l’🇪🇺 destina agli allevamenti intensivi.
Scopri di più👇
https://t.co/kzt66KYFm0
Buon 1o Maggio a tutti i lavoratori e, in particolare, a tutti i TechWorkers e lavoratori delle piattaforme!
Per non dimenticare che anche la conquista e la difesa dei diritti dei lavoratori è un lavoro continuo e rischioso ma fondamentale per la società e la democrazia
fibonhack is a CTF team born after CyberChallenge 2019 by a group of students from UniPi. We are interested in computer security, but no we can’t hack your friend’s Facebook account
https://t.co/0EVe64qRvj
...Uniti mano nella mano, avviamo il cammino di una nuova umanità.
...United hand in hand, let us set out on the path of a new humanity.
Michelangelo Pistoletto, 21.12.2022
https://t.co/WORU9xz4uz
#21march23 #preventivepeace
Say hello to two new nearby potentially habitable exoplanets! GJ 1002, a tiny red-dwarf, hosts two Earth-mass planets. The article, led by @AlexSM10000ft and written in collaboration with @CARMENES_exopl, is available now on @arxiv https://t.co/bqYJiIdzuO
Our collaboration with C.P.C. Group is pivotal to making our vision a reality. ☀️
Gamma is at C.P.C. Group in Modena, Italy. 🇮🇹
Last Seen Users on Sotwe
Trends for you
Most Popular Users
Elon Musk 
@elonmusk
241.7M followers
Barack Obama
@barackobama
119M followers
Cristiano Ronaldo
@cristiano
114.4M followers
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
111.9M followers
Narendra Modi
@narendramodi
107.2M followers
Rihanna
@rihanna
98.7M followers
NASA
@nasa
92.4M followers
Justin Bieber
@justinbieber
91.8M followers
KATY PERRY
@katyperry
90M followers
Taylor Swift
@taylorswift13
83.9M followers
Lady Gaga
@ladygaga
75.4M followers
Virat Kohli
@imvkohli
73.3M followers
Kim Kardashian
@kimkardashian
70.9M followers
YouTube
@youtube
68.8M followers
Neymar Jr
@neymarjr
66.4M followers
Bill Gates
@billgates
65.2M followers
Selena Gomez
@selenagomez
63M followers
The Ellen Show
@theellenshow
62.3M followers
CNN
@cnn
61.8M followers
X
@x
60.7M followers